Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Nanocarrier-Based Targeted Therapies for Myocardial Infarction

George TA., Hsu CC., Meeson A., Lundy DJ.

Narrative Review on Cardiovascular Disease, published in Pharmaceutics (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Pharmaceutics (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35631516
PMCID
PMC9143269
DOI
10.3390/pharmaceutics14050930
Citations
28

Abstract (original English)

Myocardial infarction is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Due to poor inherent regeneration of the adult mammalian myocardium and challenges with effective drug delivery, there has been little progress in regenerative therapies. Nanocarriers, including liposomes, nanoparticles, and exosomes, offer many potential advantages for the therapy of myocardial infarction, including improved delivery, retention, and prolonged activity of therapeutics. However, there are many challenges that have prevented the widespread clinical use of these technologies. This review aims to summarize significant principles and developments in the field, with a focus on nanocarriers using ligand-based or cell mimicry-based targeting. Lastly, a discussion of limitations and potential future direction is provided.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research